Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
bluedevil58

Loktionov: Does management resign him?

Recommended Posts

He is another smallish forward----but he looks good. He hustles. And he looks like he is

playing for a contract. If we re-signed him we would really make Semin feel at home.

Yes?     :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's playing for a contract, but so is Nash and Malhorta, and I must say he's out-shining both of them at the moment.  I didn't particularly care either way for him when he was traded, I'm going to say yes to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree he's beating the pants off both of them but if we want to get bigger on those lines he really doesn't fit.

 

He appears at face value to be a more hungry player then several of our guys, likely the contract but who really knows maybe he just has heart which would be an open change around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they sign him. For those who haven't noticed, we're in the midst of a rebuild focused on youth, with the likes of Skins, Faulk, Lindy, Nash, and now Lok and DiGuiseppe. Semin, Malhotra and Liles add steady experience, and guys like Sekera and Gerbe will round out the age scale. With any luck we trade E and Cam based on them needing a change of scene and bring in a couple of guys from elsewhere who are in the same boat (Kesler and Edler?).

 

Hopefully this off-season will be a whole lot more interesting than the season has been.

Edited by top-shelf-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's been a pleasant surprise.  Funny how guys with heart who go out and work hard on every shift stick out on this team.

 

Have no idea if he gets signed or not.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect we make him an offer but not sure we can sign him. Reportedly he had received a substantial KHL offer but opted instead to try and stick in the NHL. Big money is hard to pass up but maybe his goal is NHL success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your thoughts on this young player? I must say, he is producing. ..

Guys, We (and I'm including myself here) Caniac fans must have the ultimate in schizoid personalities! From about game # 41, we all begin to bemoan the lack of grit, absence of fight, inability to win puck battles, being man-handled by teams like Boston et. al. and how we need to draft bigger, yet we sentimentally hang on to players like Gerbs, Loki, Murphy, Lindy etc. while swooning over Tolchisky in the wings!! Now please don't misunderstand, I too love each and every one of these guys, and Loktionov is certainly one of the poster children of this group, along with Gerbe, whom I swear has a motor that never stops!

 

But, I ask one and all, where do we draw the line? Honestly, I'd love to keep each one of them, but when the likes of Columbus, Boston, up and coming Buffalo and many, many other teams pin us into their O zone, constantly controlling the puck with massive forwards and Dmen, I am about at the point that I just want to go to the beer kiosk and not return.

 

Guys, I'm afraid that we can't have it both ways. We've got to have balance to get better, and no matter how "young" these smallish players are, we absolutely have to get start getting "bigger"

 

Just my $.o2 for what its worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the price is right I like him. He has a much higher skill set than everyone under Tlusty. Speaking of which Tlusty is looking better too.

 

Everyone chases size in the NHL, and I can see why. It is a physical game. But unless you draft in a top slot, you overpay for size, you overpay for free agents. I went to the Buffalo game. Those guys are HUGE. How they doing?

 

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see us add a couple of big forwards, but if you look at this team's end result problem this year, it can be found with terrible offensive production, including a massively awful PP.

 

Bowman? Nash? Dvorak? Malhotra? Dwyer? None huge. None score. None massive hitters. 

 

Add to that all the money and expectations given what we gave for Jordan, and he's on a 44 point pace? Look, 44 points is actually decent, but not what we gave up #8 pick, B. Sutter and Doumalin for, but I digress. BTW Jussi is on pace for nearly 60 points  :hits forehead: . Last I checked he's not very big.

 

People say they want us to be a bigger rougher team. But there is a downside to chasing size: everybody is doing it, and the price/skill is high, and skilled big guys are hard to find, and usually not that physical anyway, think Eric Staal. If we can draft a big power forward, if we can pick up that allusive gritty third line guy, fine, but o/w it's overhaul time. But I digress a lot.

 

Sans tear it down, we need to look at each player. Nash is a good defensive player with no apparent offensive upside not a physical presence. Bowman? See Nash. Lotkionov is a responsible two way player with what at least appears to be some very nice offensive upside. We need to score. 

 

So, look at each player: are you big and rough and hit? Do you score or make plays and at least aren't terrible defensively? Are you Pat Dwyer? If the answer to all 3 is no, then it's been nice. We wish you all the best in your new endeavors. 

 

At least on the eyeball test, Lotkionov can score.

 

At the right price, I'd strongly consider signing him.

Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I hope you did not misunderstand my post, because I too like him "at the right price". I respect what you"ve writtem rem, but something ain't working and once again, it's difficult sitting in my section, watching fully 2/3rds of the game at the other when these larger teams descend on our barn. I recognize that purchasing size, on the open market, is prohibitively expensive, EVEN IF WE COULD FIND SOMEONE OF THAT ILK, but something needs to change. Drafting "size", like all drafting, is a crap shoot at best. JR's forays to "get bigger" have certainly fizzled. IDK the answer to this all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the price is right I like him. He has a much higher skill set than everyone under Tlusty. Speaking of which Tlusty is looking better too.

 

Everyone chases size in the NHL, and I can see why. It is a physical game. But unless you draft in a top slot, you overpay for size, you overpay for free agents. I went to the Buffalo game. Those guys are HUGE. How they doing?

 

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see us add a couple of big forwards, but if you look at this team's end result problem this year, it can be found with terrible offensive production, including a massively awful PP.

 

Bowman? Nash? Dvorak? Malhotra? Dwyer? None huge. None score. None massive hitters. 

 

Add to that all the money and expectations given what we gave for Jordan, and he's on a 44 point pace? Look, 44 points is actually decent, but not what we gave up #8 pick, B. Sutter and Doumalin for, but I digress. BTW Jussi is on pace for nearly 60 points  :hits forehead: . Last I checked he's not very big.

 

People say they want us to be a bigger rougher team. But there is a downside to chasing size: everybody is doing it, and the price/skill is high, and skilled big guys are hard to find, and usually not that physical anyway, think Eric Staal. If we can draft a big power forward, if we can pick up that allusive gritty third line guy, fine, but o/w it's overhaul time. But I digress a lot.

 

Sans tear it down, we need to look at each player. Nash is a good defensive player with no apparent offensive upside not a physical presence. Bowman? See Nash. Lotkionov is a responsible two way player with what at least appears to be some very nice offensive upside. We need to score. 

 

So, look at each player: are you big and rough and hit? Do you score or make plays and at least aren't terrible defensively? Are you Pat Dwyer? If the answer to all 3 is no, then it's been nice. We wish you all the best in your new endeavors. 

 

At least on the eyeball test, Lotkionov can score.

 

At the right price, I'd strongly consider signing him.

:goodpost:

Here's another way to look at it: obviously we want big, skilled players.  Given that there isn't a plethora of them just laying around for easy picking, what trade off between size and skill are you willing to make for the players you can get? (that's a rhetorical question ;) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear also. I don't really know either. The size and grit thing is one issue. It comes up over and over and it is a tough game so I do think we need more of that too. JR kept saying he wanted to get that, but was far better at getting smaller skilled guys in general. 

 

Cole and Ruutu were two exceptions. If we can find a Cole or Ruutu (at their best) type player out there I'm all for it. I wonder if one power forward and one gritty third line center and maybe one really physical 4th liner would be enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have big guys,  both staals, just hit more, whether you are a super star or not, dig along the boards...    Hainsey and   Harrison on the back end.... They are big.... Do we  have that stud like    Chara... no, but  not too many of those guys around..Sekera  is a  big guy......we just need to PLAY  60 minutes....  not  50, not 40, 60...   60 minutes was played last night... 3-0 win..



Cole and Ruu weren't big per say.., but they liked to hit.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a feeling Loktionov would find a groove here, and I think with the Finnish Connection gone and Semin and Khudobin here I think retaining Loktionov and potentially getting a Russian defenseman who can man a point on the PP well would round out a little Russian Reserve here. 

 

Look at our roster and show me who can pass as well as Loktionov. Now keep that in mind and tell me who can read plays as well as Loktionov as to whether to pass or shoot? This guy is one step in the right direction if you want to address powerplays. He can distribute the puck very well, he can also deceive a goalie and defense by shooting over passing. He has amazing patience and slick hands, and I imagine the more he plays with Semin the more his skillset is going to increase, which paired with his passing and his hockey sense would make for a really tough player to play against.

 

I said it when we acquired him, I think he has great potential and I think Carolina is the kind of team where he can find the most of his potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much of teams keeping us in our end have to do with size more so than our own players abilities to correctly clear a puck or being in proper position? We're not the biggest, not the smallest, but I've never thought that we get bullied. Our players hold there own. They stand up for each other when necessary (for the most part). I think we should look at skill level before size at all times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How much of teams keeping us in our end have to do with size more so than our own players abilities to correctly clear a puck or being in proper position? We're not the biggest, not the smallest, but I've never thought that we get bullied. Our players hold there own. They stand up for each other when necessary (for the most part). I think we should look at skill level before size at all times.

 PK17, you are joking, right? You and I must be watching different games, if you don't think teams like Boston don't just completely steam roll us. And there have many teams built like them who do exactly that.

Now, I suppose we could debate that the reason we seem to be literally pinned into our end against these teams is due to inability of "puck movement", but when a player is getting the crap knocked out of him time and time again, I suppose that might limit his ability to move the puck effectively.

Thus, we can call it whatever we want, I just think that contrary to your suggestion that we "can hold our own", I happen to believe that we are one of the "softest" teams in the NHL. Can this team occasionally rise to the challange, most certainly, but the real question is, Can they consistently bring this tough level of compete, no I do not think so.

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  PK17, you are joking, right? You and I must be watching different games, if you don't think teams like Boston don't just completely steam roll us. And there have many teams built like them who do exactly that.

Now, I suppose we could debate that the reason we seem to be literally pinned into our end against these teams is due to inability of "puck movement", but when a player is getting the crap knocked out of him time and time again, I suppose that might limit his ability to move the puck effectively.

Thus, we can call it whatever we want, I just think that contrary to your suggestion that we "can hold our own", I happen to believe that we are one of the "softest" teams in the NHL. Can this team occasionally rise to the challange, most certainly, but the real question is, Can they consistently bring this tough level of compete, no I do not think so.

 

 

I guess this is where we have to agree to disagree, and normally i agree with most of your opinions.  I don't think we get bullied by Boston, i just think not only are they better, but they match up against us better.  Even when this team was formidable, they still always beat us.  Against other "big" teams like philly and washington, we've actually done pretty good against this year.  And this new phase of hockey in the NHL, it favors quicker teams like the Canadiens & Toronto.  I certainly don't think we're soft, I honestly can't name a soft player on our team.  Actually the one player I thought could be a little grittier was Hainsey, who's been fighting everyone recently.  Size is always nice, but I wouldn't go out of my way to obtain Option A if Option B was more available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the same boat as others, I've liked what I've seen but we are the softest team in the league. I certainly prefer him over Bowman, Nash, Dvorak, etc., but like someone else said where do you draw the line. I think we need to get more physical up front, so how many pieces, including Dwyer and Gerbe can you keep. Do you let a young, skilled player who is giving his all walk because you simply don't have room for him in your quest to get more physical? I don't know. I'm actually leaning towards keeping him and letting a lot of others walk/be moved. I want guys that show they want it, and so far he has. But we need to get tougher/more physical up front. It's tough. We have some guys who could do it but they don't (see: Eric Staal), but players don't change.

The other question is can he play wing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  PK17, you are joking, right? You and I must be watching different games, if you don't think teams like Boston don't just completely steam roll us. And there have many teams built like them who do exactly that.

Now, I suppose we could debate that the reason we seem to be literally pinned into our end against these teams is due to inability of "puck movement", but when a player is getting the crap knocked out of him time and time again, I suppose that might limit his ability to move the puck effectively.

Thus, we can call it whatever we want, I just think that contrary to your suggestion that we "can hold our own", I happen to believe that we are one of the "softest" teams in the NHL. Can this team occasionally rise to the challange, most certainly, but the real question is, Can they consistently bring this tough level of compete, no I do not think so.

Kjun, I'm closer to PKs perspective than yours.  Except for Boston, I don't think this team has been pushed around this year at all (and Boston seems to be pusing around everybody lately).  Note that to me, this is a different issue than the team playing a more physical style of hockey in certain areas (like in front of the net), which I do think they need to do.  But as far as being physically dominated or intimidated? I just haven't seen it for the vast majority of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loki will be given a qualifying offer, no doubt.  He doesn't make a ton, and the new GM is going to have to fill out a roster with something.  He's as good or better than a lot of the other dead wood on this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys, I concede. Seems like the concensus is we're not bullied or pushed around by any other team.      Maybe I need new glasses? Also, don't misunderstand my position re: need for size, to suggest that I don't also want to keep both Gerbe, as well as Loktionov, because I would like to resign both!

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys, I concede. Seems like the concensus is we're not bullied or pushed around by any other team.      Maybe I need new glasses? Also, don't misunderstand my position re: need for size, to suggest that I don't also want to keep both Gerbe, as well as Loktionov, because I would like to resign both!

This team is dying for size, but I still say Loki gets an offer because he is cheap and PK is probably going to demand some salary pull backs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that points aren't everything, and system and compete and battles and physicality and all of that figures in, but to make a point.

 
This team may suffer from lack of grit, tough, size, but I would contend that the real problem is that they did not score, at least with the team we have or in theory wanted to have. What I mean gets a little to the identity question. We are not a huge physical, beat you up night in and night out intimidating team. But we could have been a team that played decent positional defense and transitioned into an up temp game, and with an at least modestly aggressive forecheck THAT COULD LIGHT THE LAMP across three lines. 
 
But we did not do that. We have wanted to in theory, but we could not get three scoring lines going. Now my assessment of the NHL is that having three truly threatening lines is actually difficult and only the elite have it. (Does kind of make you want it though). 
 
In the past I have gone down the list of every team in the league at the end of the year to figure out how many point producing forwards each team has. In a word very few have as many as you think. Pittsburgh, Boston, Chicago, LA, etc. the best teams, all go 5-7 deep that can at least put up 35 points per year, with obviously several much higher end guys. But the good majority of teams do not go that deep at all. 
 
So, 35 points does not seem that high. Well it actually is. 
 
The "top 6" of 30 teams equals 180 forwards. Last full year (two years ago) there were 166 forwards with 35 points or more in the NHL.
 
Thus, at least in theory, 35 points would put you on about half of NHL team's top 6. 
 
 
So, I guy like Lotkionov, who was on a 35 point pace in the lockout year, and just looks like a guy who should be able to hit that, along with a Gerbe, who has 31 points this year already, are worth trying. Maybe put a decent priced Tlusty on there and you have a third line that at least in theory, could be as productive as some second lines. And all of those guys bring it, and contribute in a lot of other ways, including defensively.
 
Add one key power forward to the top 6 and get the "off year, another year older improvement" from Lindholm. And who knows? My poll shows very little fan stomach for trading a Staal or Semin or Skinner. Maybe E and J put it together. Maybe Skinner plays some defense and passes a little. Maybe Semin, who has been on a near PPG pace for quite a while now, keeps that going....OK the Island is ravaged right now, so it's a dream but still...
 
Look I know that isn't changing the team up much really, but a quicker fix than chasing size would be to add some size to the 4th line, one KEY power forward to the top 6, and then chase goals and hard responsible two way play instead.
 
Just my way of saying sign Lotkionov unless there is a clear big upgrade out there that have been really hard to find in the past.
 
Now getting that power forward that could be ideally a 50 point guy would be the trick.
Edited by remkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys, I concede. Seems like the concensus is we're not bullied or pushed around by any other team.      Maybe I need new glasses? Also, don't misunderstand my position re: need for size, to suggest that I don't also want to keep both Gerbe, as well as Loktionov, because I would like to resign both!

 

I don't know if its a consensus. I don't think we are bullied like the past couple of seasons when Skiiner was taking a beating and the rest of the team bought tickets to watch but we do get pushed off the puck a lot. We are still lacking some toughness and need to address that. Power forward, tougher 4th line, a hard to play against Dman for a start.

 

The reason to sign Loktionov is because he is fast and looks like he could break out. More importantly he gives you insurance if you trade one or more of our top 9. It isn't out of the question (IMO) that he could be signed and traded as part of a package if the right deal presented itself. Those are the reasons I would make him an offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...